CBB Matchups

Every D1 game with tempo-free ratings, four factors and market lines, one place.

College basketball is being built for the 2026-27 season (tip-off Nov 3). What's here fills in as games are played.
Non-conferenceMadison Square Garden, New York, NY
Syracuse
Efficiency #85
2025-26: 15-17 · 6-13 conf
@
St John's
Efficiency #16
2025-26: 30-7 · 21-2 conf
Sun, Nov 15 · TBD
68.9
win 16%
Projected
80.6
win 84%
No line posted yet.
Model: SJU −11.7 · total 149.5 · ratings as of Sat, Oct 3
Preseason ratings start from 2025-26's final adjusted ratings, regressed toward the D1 average. The stats below are 2025-26's too; both update once 2026-27 games are played.

How the projection is built

each step, from an average D-I game to this one
Projected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: St John's 69.7, Syracuse 68.3 → 69.7 possessions
+3.0
St John's offense vs Syracuse defense
+3.0
Syracuse offense vs St John's defense
−4.7
Projected total
149.5
Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
St John's offense vs Syracuse defense
+3.0
Syracuse offense vs St John's defense
+4.7
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
St John's by 11.7
11.7
Syracuse side ◂▸ St John's side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help St John's.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, St John's is the faster team (70.6, #74 of 365) and Syracuse the slower (67.8, #212). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
69.7
per team, 40 min
Projected total
149.5
model
Projected team totals
68.9 / 80.6
Syracuse / St John's
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.3#185
Syracuse
69.7#70
St John's

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet
DefenseSyracuse
Syracuse's shot-blocking
Syracuse ranks #7 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 13.7% of St John's's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
AdvantageSt John's
Where St John's scores: the offensive glass
St John's rebounds 35.2% of its own misses (#43); Syracuse lets opponents grab 33.6% of their own misses (#310). Expect about 35.3%, 4.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.0 points per 100 possessions.
ClashSyracuse
Style match: ball movement
Syracuse creates off the dribble (assists on 47.1% of its baskets); St John's breaks up passing offenses (assists on 46.6% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 45.2% — both habits push the same way.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (St John's's defense) is close to a coin flip going forward — the study's model of next-game 3P% barely beats guessing the D1 average. Shot volume is what actually carries: expect Syracuse at about 33.5% of its shots from three, St John's about 33.7%.
ClashSt John's
Style match: 3-point volume
St John's rarely shoots threes (35.2% of its shots); Syracuse runs teams off the line (35.9% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 33.7% — both habits push the same way.
AdvantageSyracuse
Where Syracuse struggles: shooting
Syracuse shoots an effective 52.6% (#122); St John's allows 47.5% (#32). Expect about 50.1%, 1.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.7 points per 100 possessions.
Syracuse has the ball
OffenseSt John's allowsvs D1 avg
52.6% #122
47.5% #32
-1.7 pt/100
16.0% #136
19.1% #44
-1.2 pt/100
29.2% #228
29.9% #154
-0.6 pt/100
35.1% #171
31.8% #100
-0.2 pt/100
64.8% #361
—
-0.7 pt/100
Syracuse net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -4.4 pts/100
St John's has the ball
OffenseSyracuse allowsvs D1 avg
51.1% #192
50.3% #116
-0.9 pt/100
14.4% #39
17.4% #124
+1.1 pt/100
35.2% #43
33.6% #310
+3.0 pt/100
40.2% #57
32.6% #117
+0.1 pt/100
72.2% #200
—
-0.0 pt/100
St John's net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.3 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers
Syracuseoffense vsSt John'sdefense
Share of shots by zone
Syracuse shoots
St John's allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim62.4%#6453.8%#3858.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)41.9%#12633.6%#3639.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)36.8%#23339.0%#20138.0%
Three32.9%#23931.3%#3933.7%
St John'soffense vsSyracusedefense
Share of shots by zone
St John's shoots
Syracuse allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim58.5%#17760.1%#23258.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)34.1%#30238.1%#13839.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)37.2%#21531.0%#938.0%
Three33.5%#19634.1%#18633.7%
RimShort 2 (≤9 ft)Mid 2 (10 ft+)Three

Zones from play-by-play shot descriptions; garbage time removed. Bars show the share of field-goal attempts in each zone; where a slice is too thin for its number, the shares are listed under the bar. FG% ranks: #1 = best for that side (most accurate shooting, stingiest defense).

Shot volume

Extra scoring chances from rebounds, turnovers and the foul line · 2025-26 numbers
Syracuse
+0.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#165 of 365
Off reb %
29.2%
#228
Def reb %
66.4%
#310
Turnover %
16.0%
#136
Forced TO %
17.4%
#124
FT rate
35.1%
#171
FT allowed
32.6%
#117
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.4
Defensive rebounding−1.0
Ball security+0.6
Forcing turnovers+0.5
Foul shots drawn0.0
Foul shots allowed+0.7
St John's
+7.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#6 of 365
Off reb %
35.2%
#43
Def reb %
70.1%
#154
Turnover %
14.4%
#39
Forced TO %
19.1%
#44
FT rate
40.2%
#57
FT allowed
31.8%
#100
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.6
Defensive rebounding+0.2
Ball security+1.6
Forcing turnovers+1.6
Foul shots drawn+1.3
Foul shots allowed+0.9

St John's has more extra scoring chances per game: +7.2 (#6 of 365) to Syracuse’s +0.4 (#165).

Grade = extra shots and foul-line trips per game compared with a D-I average team, built from six season rates. Cell shading is the national rank for each rate (greener = better for that team).

Rotation

Syracuse2025-26 numbers
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
4Gavin Dotyat SienaGJr6'5"35-3536.718.06.92.21.050.8%32.6%4.085.8%28.4%
25Aiden Tobiasonat TempleGJr6'6"32-3235.415.33.72.01.455.1%33.8%4.380.0%24.3%
23Luke Wilsonat App StateCJr6'10"32-3028.210.78.30.61.164.2%—0.056.7%21.2%
11Francis Folefacat SienaFSo6'7"35-2628.111.35.32.22.052.6%37.5%0.574.0%26.2%
3Garwey Dualat McNeeseGSr6'5"34-1726.68.42.94.41.650.9%31.6%2.276.4%21.0%
7Kiyan AnthonyGSo6'5"29-218.78.01.40.91.044.6%25.4%2.462.8%28.7%
1Sadiq White Jr.FSo6'8"31-1115.26.13.30.40.957.1%36.8%0.651.3%24.4%
5Tasman Goodrickat SienaFSr6'10"9-923.49.77.31.31.064.5%0.0%0.158.3%22.4%
24Noah LobdellGJr6'0"4-01.30.00.00.00.00.0%0.0%0.5—23.7%
6Calvin Russell IIIGSo6'5"1-02.03.01.00.01.033.3%—0.0100.0%126.8%
10Abdramane SibyCFr7'0"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
2Ethan ButlerGFr6'4"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
13Iker MartinezCFr7'0"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
12Mark MoranoFFr6'6"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
0Ryan MoeschGFr6'0"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Transfers in: Gavin Doty (from Siena), Garwey Dual (from McNeese), Francis Folefac (from Siena), Tasman Goodrick (from Siena), Aiden Tobiason (from Temple), Luke Wilson (from App State)

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home
SyracuseSt John's
Efficiency
111.0
115.2
106.1
99.2
68.3
69.7
—
—
Shooting
52.6%
51.1%
54.5%
51.5%
32.9%
33.5%
64.8%
72.2%
35.1%
40.2%
Ball control & glass
16.0%
14.4%
17.4%
19.1%
29.2%
35.2%
33.6%
29.9%
9.9%
8.6%
7.9%
10.0%
Style
37.2%
35.2%
47.6%
45.0%
15.5%
16.7%
47.1%
57.9%
27.2%
31.0%
Roster
2.86
2.24
6'6.6"
6'4.7"
15.6%
39.3%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
Syracuse
Returning minutes: 15.6%Returning production: 13.6%
Lost
  • Naithan George 32.2 mpg, 10.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Nate Kingz 31.3 mpg, 12.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • William Kyle III 28.1 mpg, 8.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • J.J. Starling 27.2 mpg, 10.3 ppg · transferred to Buffalo
  • Donnie Freeman 22.5 mpg, 11.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Tyler Betsey 17.5 mpg, 6.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
  • Gavin Doty from Siena · 36.7 mpg, 18.0 ppg last season
  • Aiden Tobiason from Temple · 35.4 mpg, 15.3 ppg last season
  • Luke Wilson from App State · 28.2 mpg, 10.7 ppg last season
  • Francis Folefac from Siena · 28.1 mpg, 11.3 ppg last season
  • Garwey Dual from McNeese · 26.6 mpg, 8.4 ppg last season
  • Tasman Goodrick from Siena · 6.0 mpg, 2.5 ppg last season

Returns 16% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (1 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).

St John's
Returning minutes: 39.3%Returning production: 32.0%
Lost
  • Zuby Ejiofor 30.1 mpg, 16.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Bryce Hopkins 28.8 mpg, 13.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Oziyah Sellers 28.6 mpg, 10.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Dillon Mitchell 28.1 mpg, 8.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Sadiku Ibine Ayo 6.2 mpg, 1.4 ppg · transferred to Iona
Added
  • Imran Suljanovic no D1 minutes last season

No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.

Returns 39% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).

Head-to-head

this season and last
No meetings the last two seasons.

The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — Pinnacle's spread and total (the median across books when Pinnacle has no line). Three views switch the table between projected scores, pace and totals, and each team's offensive and defensive tendencies. Each game opens into opponent-adjusted possessions, efficiency and four-factor tendencies for both teams, plus recent form, rotation and head-to-head history. Every game also carries our projected score, spread and total, built bottom-up from those same numbers: expected possessions times each side's opponent-adjusted points per possession, plus home court.

What these numbers mean: line shopping.